Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Sourcerer's Apprentice and the study of code snippet migration

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1808.00106 v1 pith:EIVNKBRK submitted 2018-07-31 cs.SE

Sourcerer's Apprentice and the study of code snippet migration

classification cs.SE
keywords softwarestackoverflowapprenticecodepythonsnippetsdevelopersdevelopment
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

On the worldwide web, not only are webpages connected but source code is too. Software development is becoming more accessible to everyone and the licensing for software remains complicated. We need to know if software licenses are being maintained properly throughout their reuse and evolution. This motivated the development of the Sourcerer's Apprentice, a webservice that helps track clone relicensing, because software typically employ software licenses to describe how their software may be used and adapted. But most developers do not have the legal expertise to sort out license conflicts. In this paper we put the Apprentice to work on empirical studies that demonstrate there is much sharing between StackOverflow code and Python modules and Python documentation that violates the licensing of the original Python modules and documentation: software snippets shared through StackOverflow are often being relicensed improperly to CC-BY-SA 3.0 without maintaining the appropriate attribution. We show that many snippets on StackOverflow are inappropriately relicensed by StackOverflow users, jeopardizing the status of the software built by companies and developers who reuse StackOverflow snippets.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Project-wise Comparison of Software Birthmarks Using Weighted Partial Similarity

    cs.SE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Proposes weighted partial similarity framework for project-level software birthmark comparison to detect partial code reuse.

  2. Detection of LLM-assisted Code Plagiarism Using k-gram Software Birthmarks

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    Opcode k-gram software birthmarks, especially 2-grams with Dice similarity, detect LLM code paraphrasing with high Hmean, though ChatGPT-style models are hardest to catch.

  3. Project-wise Comparison of Software Birthmarks Using Weighted Partial Similarity

    cs.SE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A weighted partial similarity framework for project-wise software birthmark comparison outperforms prior methods on harmonic mean of resilience and credibility across 35 Java projects with public artifacts.